Online Safety Act

Sorry but no, there’s no international mechanism for fining a company oversees. While yes they are technically bound to it, I personally don’t consider them as such because there’s no way to actually punish them.

It’s actually slightly different if we were still in the EU. There’s a bit more muscle behind it/a few less places for them to be without punishment.

But my biggest issue has nothing to do with GDPR really. I’m sure they can tick all the boxes. Doesn’t stop them having data leaks though and everyone’s private information being exposed.

 

But again that's not what I responded to.

They are obliged to abide by GDPR. The ICO has successfully fined numerous overseas organisations for non compliance. The only one who wriggled off the hook was clearview because they collected publicly available images for the US government and appealed to a US court who of course stopped the fine being enforced. The notable thing is that they had to go through a complex and expensive legal case to get out of paying - because the fine was legal despite them not being UK based.

As for data breaches. As with anything else online, just read the Ts & Cs. The first two I looked at state clearly they only store the data of whether you are over 18 and everything else is not kept. Unlike social media and other online services they are not collecting and storing vast amounts of personal data. Its kinda weird that this particular place of handing over data is the final straw for so many.

 

Honestly i’ve seen too much in my career to risk it. Even if that’s what the terms and conditions say, you’d be surprised at how little that can matter at companies where it really should matter…

A selfie is one thing, but not a chance i’m uploading my driving license or passport to any of these services, which i have seen some asking for.

 

I do see your point.. but we also need to be careful we stick to facts. Not trusting is one thing. But saying they aren't bound by law is another.

Would you be more open to a nationalised service for age verification? Controlled by the taxpayer. UK based and able to verify through cross checks?

 

I’d personally prefer a centralised system where you’re given a code or something to verify your age on a site which can then be verified as a real code, with the government service not knowing who is checking it and the website now knowing your identity beyond “yes they’re 18” - but i don’t think it’s realistic.

For one. it would require all these websites to implement it which isn’t always going to even be possible. Many just wouldn’t see UK traffic as worth the time investment. It would also be open to people just using someone else’s code.

And finally, again, it wouldn’t even do anything useful. Because it’s just not possible to lock down the internet in the way that this would require. It just isn’t. There’s no way around that at all.

The whole point of the internet is that anybody can buy a domain name and host a website or anything whenever they want. Just the fact that’s how the internet works blocks this exercise from being possible.

 

We get it’s not perfect, we get it’s not fully possible, but so is everything in the world. Kids aren’t allowed to buy booze. We know they can nick it, we know they stand outside shops and get strangers to buy it for them, we know they get their older mates to buy it for them, we know they have secretly drink their parents’ and top it up with water. That doesn’t mean we make it legal to sell it directly to them. It impacts adults who forget their ID, or can’t afford any ID but that’s classed as a sacrifice worth making to protect kids. The Online Safety Act will prevent thousands upon thousands of kids from viewing things they shouldn’t and yes, there’ll be some sacrifices along the way from adults who don’t want to verify their age and there’ll be plenty of older kids who find ways around it. Just like people find their way around every law in existence. Who knows, maybe this will be the start of other counties implementing similar things and an international standard and we’ll be the world leaders of change.

 

How about the Blockchain? I'm aware of Concordium as an ID verification service where you control your own data. But I'm sure there are others. If these ID services accepted Concordium or similar as age verification then people could choose to use it as proof while handing over no useable data.

There has to be ways out there to at least protect children.. without the censorship/privacy issues you are concerned about. A global initiative on ID verification specifically for porn/suicide/self harm content (not the other more vague stuff i appreciate your concerns about) is what is really needed to make this work. There would be loopholes to iron out no doubt but we have to do better for our kids.

 

If booze with LSD in it was just as accessible as regulated booze and impossible to ban i think it would probably be a bit more complicated though.

Fortunately that’s not the case when it comes to alcohol but it is when it comes to the internet. I really do think the only solution to this problem is to give the tools and education to parents. Anything else is just going to make the problem worse.

We’re never going to agree on that though.

 

The only way is the locking down of devices. But it’s something that has to be done by parents.

The tools already exist for workplaces. They can be expanded and made easy to use for parents.

 

The sad reality is that parents who buy their kid a phone at 8 year olds let them Download tiktok and then turn a blind eye to anything they're doing are the ones who are putting said kids in danger but from what I hear a lot it appears to be the case that a parent can do no wrong and a kid is merely their property to do with as it pleases. What we need is more regulation of parents imo.

 

Not really… it’s not changed much. Since the ban McDonald’s has increased its output. Also there are more from Starbucks, Dunkin’ donuts, etc. they all use plastic lids….

Fits my meaning very well. People like yourself patting themselves on the back, whilst nothings really changed.

 

Hi.

2000 tonnes of plastic waste per year stopped is a worthy start.

So you're aware: plastic drink lids are being phased out in favour of sustainable alternatives like fibre.. but it was a more challenging and complicated change than the easy win of straws but we're getting there. There are further changes in the pipeline too but it gers hard to maintain public safety and mass production as the plastic objects become more complex and vital components of the industry. These kinds of changes cant just happen overnight.

Now if we could tackle the fishing industry we could make real waves as they are responsible for about 75% of ocean plastic. But noone wants to touch them. They are always seen as victims despite often doing nothing to improve... unlike corporations who are actually taking positive action on this.

I've been working in ans around conservation and environmental science for nearly 2 decades and we celebrate every step forwards while always looking to the next. There is a long long way to go.

Don't suppose you've ever taken part in a sea turtle autopsy and found its stomach full of plastic bags it mistook for jellyfish? I have.

Make no mistake this is a war and we'll take every win we can get.

What exactly have YOU done?

 

Wow… didn’t realise you were such a big plastic fish. Point missed though.

 

You’re absolutely right.

Apparently you can’t suggest that patents should be helped to block content though and instead of expecting them to be responsible a badly thought out censorship of anything that might upset the pearl clutchers is better than nothing.

 

Not really. Your example makes no sense to me...but we're not here to talk about plastic because I could derail this thread with a thesis level essay!

I appreciate what you were trying to say though

 

He actually suggested accountability for parents who don't which goes far further than your suggestion of an honesty system. A national scheme and rollout of parental protection standards as well as regulations to standardise provisions on devices and via providers would help a lot. Just as an example.. The inconsistency of how effective parental controls are from one TV app to the next is a nightmare.

I appreciate we have gone at each other over this but we are clearly looking from very different perspectives and at different outcomes of this act. However it has to be a good thing that we are talking about this issue. It has been ignored for way too long. Both protecting children and protecting society from malicious censorship.

 

I've only skim read this, but there are ways to do this - although this is just off the top of my head.

1. All mobile devices and broadband connections to come with age-restricted SIMs - under 14 (very restricted), 14-17 (somewhat restricted), and 18+ and at sale time the purchaser has to specify the age limit of the people who will be using the internet connection and are legally responsible for devices using their connection - which would be difficult to implement.

2. A whitelist for web sites using a review system like the BBFC - with all international sites blocked until they are approved and classified. All British-based sites can be classified by the owner by completely some web forms, but with big fines for any lying on them. You can use DNSSEC and limit outward DNS queries outside the UK to allowed DNS servers (this is simply a matter of blocking port 53 on the outbound pipes unless from certain authorized hosts). This would limit access to new sites, but it would also reduce the risk of fraud and access to content.

Its technically awkward and cumbersome, but it could be possible - although we'd still have people moaning that they can't get access to their favourite free adult sites.

 

Are you seriously suggesting blocking all foreign sites until they’re manually approved?

Do you have any idea how much chaos that would cause?

 

Come off it. It's not clutching at pearls to not want, as an example, a vulnerable 11-year-old to be fed content on self-harm and suicide by an algorithm because they once searched Google saying that they felt sad. You either have absolutely no idea the kinds of things that exist on the internet (I doubt it) or you do know but are willing to just let it happen, despite knowing how harmful it is so long as you can point a finger and say 'bad parent'. Yes, in an ideal world parents would stop them but you're the biggest naive person in naive town if you think that's ever going to happen. Whether it's because parents don't care less, don't know how or just have a very wrong opinion of how much their child 'can be trusted to be sensible' (and I don't mean that their child is untrustworthy, just that they are still a child and have no idea how to not be led down a rabbit hole).

I've known literally thousands of parents in my career and in real life and almost all parents tend to fall under the following categories:

- The parents/carers of intelligent, well-behaved kids who feel their child doesn't needs parental controls, because they know not to go on things they shouldn't, and they trust them to tell them if they see anything that makes them uncomfortable. That's all well and good until the kid doesn't. These ones tend to always have the exact same excuse 'they know I can ask to see their phone at any time and they have to unlock it and show me' or 'they know that whilst I pay the bills, I'm allowed to read their messages'. It's like they really believe their kids wouldn't delete messages/erase search history before they ever get a chance to ask.
- The parents/carers who absolutely couldn't care less what their kid gets up to. It's the type who would let their kids go off until 11pm on their own and think that they're safer being at home on their device instead. There's a million things they can see online that they would never have had any clue about playing out and making dens.
- The parents/carers who know they should use controls but are unable to control their kid, in fact are quite often scared of their kid, and know that it's too much of a hassle so they don't for an easy life.
- The parents/carers who don't know anything about technology/the internet other than their favourite site or two and who might start to use controls if they learned about it.
- The parents/carers who used controls on ipads etc. when their kids were little but think relaxing that from secondary school is just all part of letting them grow up. It's too nuanced for them approving some sites and keeping others blocked. Often blocking goes too far to the point the kids can't search anything to do their homework, or there's one game they'd be happy to let them play but it's blocked so they just turn it off with a strict one-off warning at the time to be good.
- A very small minority who use full parental controls/don't let their kid have a smartphone.

 

I don’t think i content pushing suicide or self harm should be pushed on ANYBODY. Social media companies have a lot to answer for that this content isn’t immediately removed.

But blocking it for some users and not others without a way to allow it on your account without having to hand over personal information is not a solution i will ever be ok with. Hide it by default but instead of forcing censorship the government should be doing the opposite and ensuring that social media companies are NOT using hidden algorithms to hide certain content from certain people.

And this is where the parental responsibility comes in that they should have the accounts of their kids set up in a way that they don’t have permission or the ability to turn this content on.